What is it about?
Discourse produced by the general public on a phone in program on Irish National radio was analyzed using a critical discursive psychology approach. It examined voices that displayed sympathy towards refugees arriving at the borders of Europe. Although speakers described and shared their emotional distress caused by the unfolding refuges crisis they struggle to advocate unconditional and unambiguous inclusion of the refugees into Ireland.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
Discourse describing and sharing feelings of sympathy towards the plight of refugees are readily available and easily expressed. But talk declaring inclusive political solidarity with the refugees is problematic and constrained by the universally accepted, taking for granted understanding that the nation state has the moral right to excluded. Hence, discourse conforms to a hegemonic ambivalent paternalism towards refugees.
Perspectives
One challenging social and political issues of our time is the ongoing European refugee crisis. The motivation for refugees to embark on perilous journeys in search of a better life exposes a significant disparity between the lives of those within Europe and those beyond its borders. Hence, it is vital for research to provide insight into how European citizens are reacting to this position of privilege and power, and its affective consequence. This study examined the remit of sympathetic discourses and the capacity for these repertoires to extend to calls of inclusive political solidarity with the refugees.
Mr Alastair Nightingale
University of Limerick
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: “It's just heart breaking”: Doing inclusive political solidarity or ambivalent paternalism through sympathetic discourse within the “refugee crisis” debate, Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, February 2017, Wiley,
DOI: 10.1002/casp.2303.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
